There’s also the agreement with the Unions. That saved full-time CMs so the axe had to fall on the part-time staff. Even full-time entertainment CMs, who did a lot of the meet&greets and character dining have been re-deployed to other roles, such as dining and resorts, replacing CMs that were laid off.
I saw the announcement that 720 of 780 members received notice ? I think I can think of 35-40 off the top of my head (assuming that only one person is in a role) but it does not seem like there were any transfers in this unit?
I was really happy and excited that Frozen Singalong was open, and of course we went to see it Monday. I was so happy that I was watching it that I actually got misty-eyed. Then I saw where all the other shows were canceled, and I wondered why this one “made it”. Of course, with only five people at most on stage at a time, they could definitely keep the actors distanced. It’s still wrenching to see the rest closed. 
1 Like
Who Is to Blame for Walt Disney World’s Layoffs?
I started posting my two cents worth earlier today but I think this article does a better job. I have to agree with most of what he writes.
2 Likes
The blame game rarely had any winners…
1 Like
I understand the perspective but I think it is a vicious circle and Disney, as a company, is making decisions that are impacting this.
Disney has on-site resorts closed. There are few if any on-site benefits right now, so what is the incentive?
DVC members have “purchased” their stays already, but let’s be clear- dues guarantee Disney money to offset costs. With no current DVC benefits, a member could look differently at RCI. If you don’t want to offer a Gold AP, you could offer a great ticket discount.
Guests are reporting long lines, and no choices to offset those lines. A bad experience is not going to help their business model.
Yes, Covid is an issue but as the article points out, reducing all entertainment, focusing only on attractions, is a business decision and that is what keeps nagging at me.
2 Likes
Yup. All made sense to me.
Yup, me 2. All roads lead to Covid and everything else is just fighting the symptom while ignoring the problem. Disney is beginning to look like the proverbial “canary in the coal mine.”
Disneyland in California is closed and looks like it will continue to be closed for a long time to come.
Disneyland Paris is closing again and will be for at least a month. What kind of experience can Disney offer at those parks?
Different people have various and different levels of risk versus reward incentives. Large numbers of people either cannot or will not come to WDW regardless of what extra benefits or incentives WDW might offer or choose to offer. It will take a long time for many to be willing to return and the prime factor involved (Covid-19) is out of Disney’s control.
There are Disney fans who are willing to come regardless of the incentives in place or the cost involved. I have rarely seen or heard a post reopening trip report that was completely negative. Most seem to have had a good time regardless of the current situation.
Yes, Disney is making business decisions. They are a for profit corporation. Their focus right now is not increasing revenue but rather controlling their losses. The parks operations are going to be losing money for the Disney Corporation for the foreseeable future. To operate parks during a pandemic is going to require extreme limitations in capacity. They need to offer the most capacity at the least cost.
There seems to be a sense of entitlement among some that WDW has given me this in the past and they need to keep giving me the exact experience that I want. Unfortunately, right now that is not possible. People do have a choice, if they feel that the incentives to come are not worth the price, then they have the choice not to come. Others can go if they decide the price is right,
WDW has always offered different levels of incentives at different price points. Price Elasticity is something that WDW manages very well. I’ve said it before and I will say it again, it is a brave new world for WDW. The way things are going right now, there is a good chance WDW might have to close again for lockdowns.
1 Like
Mostly agree with the article but could do without the finger pointing about masks without regard to people’s specific location/situation.
How about just blaming the pandemic in general and leave it there?
2 Likes
Obviously no one knows the future at this point. 2020 has proven that! But, I feel fairly confident in saying I don’t believe WDW will have to close again. I don’t see Florida locking down. After all, WDW opened up to the public just about when they were at the absolute worst. Things are going back up again GRADUALLY in Florida right now, but we, so far, aren’t seeing the kind of trajectory we saw back in late June/early July when it shot way up very quickly. It is POSSIBLE that the massive number of cases Florida experienced back then will aid in them having a much slower rise that is happening now (presumably due to schools opening up).
If Florida didn’t lockdown then, and Disney opened up then, I think it will take an awful lot for it to happen again. In fact, at the MOMENT, the number of deaths in Florida from COVID is still on the downward trend.
I say this with a little bit (okay, a lot) of hope mixed into some analysis of things. Because I am struggling to see how Disney could survive another full shutdown. None of the other Disney Parks provide the kind of financial backbone that WDW does. And even if they do survive a second shutdown like that, it will extend their recovery out to probably more like 5+ years.
No matter what…a vaccine for this stupid virus can’t get here soon enough! 
2 Likes
Why do I think Disney publicly stated that when they first opened, at reduced capacity (lower than now), they said they were making a profit, small, but a profit?
No, it was the Disney Corp- 3rd quarter- with everything shut.
You are correct. Disney did say they were making a small profit, but I think it was for the overall company in the third quarter.
The theme parks lost money (they were closed for much of the time) but the company still made a profit? Lol same data being reported…
Let’s be clear, I have two 2021 resort stays booked, but I took off my rose colored glasses. I understand they are a business but in a pandemic I personally think companies like Disney should consider beyond their shareholders. Just my personal feeling.
1 Like
I hear where you’re coming from. As I understand it, though, there are limits to what they can do in that regard due to the way we’ve set up our economic/legal system. If they don’t prioritize their shareholders’ profits, they can be sued. Now, that doesn’t prevent Disney from shifting dollars around and they could arguably decide to prioritize the employment of entertainment workers at the cost of something else. But at the end of the day, they have to be able to make the case that they’re working in the best interest of their shareholders.
Paying dividends to shareholders rather than using that money in the company is mandated? I read this and thought it was a choice? Is it not a choice for some companies?
I don’t claim to be an expert, but I believe you’re right. I don’t think they need to pay dividends to shareholders. I don’t follow Disney’s practices closely enough to know whether they’re doing that. (From your post I’m assuming that they are. Yes?)
I’m sorry if I wasn’t catching your point well enough. I read your post to be asking Disney to put other things, like their employees’ financial wellbeing, before their stock price and therefore before their shareholders. As in, WDW, don’t consider your shareholders, just keep those employees because it’s the right thing to do! Which I do think could get them in trouble. If they can help both their employees and their shareholders, then that’s great, but I don’t think they’re supposed to prioritize employees’ interests to the point where the company’s stocks are negatively impacted.
It does seem somewhat ludicrous to lay off thousands while paying dividends to stockholders. I would hope that wasn’t a financial/legal requirement!
(If someone with more expertise wants to jump in and clarify how much leeway public businesses have in terms of their business decisions and how those decisions impact stock prices and other shareholder benefits like dividends, that would be welcome!)
From what I could see (briefly) they paid out $.88 a share and have over 1 billion shares? In August?
My frustration in the end is that Disney is in some part deciding to limit options in the parks because it is a long-term business decision. That article states it is not a safety concern. If it is not a safety concern it bothers me.
I can’s speak to any legal aspects of this at all…but one thing to keep in mind is that the reason people invest into a company, fundamentally, is to make money. Sure, they might choose a company that they “believe in” or is doing something positive in their eyes. But ultimately, the money is not invested so that the company can employ people. Employment is just a byproduct of that investment. But the money is invested so that the shareholder can get a return on that investment.
So, while it does seem cold-hearted to say so, laying off people so that a company can pay dividends is actually a potentially good BUSINESS strategy.
Now, of course, any decent business that wants to continue to make money for its shareholders not JUST in the short term, but the longer term, DOES, in fact, have to weight the consequences that come with their decisions, including lay offs. So, it might hurt shareholder value int he long term if a company lays off thousands of people if public perception is harmed, or perhaps there is loss of collective knowledge that is not easily replaced, etc.
What is happening right now with Disney looks more like a last-ditch effort to keep from bleeding money, which not only impacts short term shareholder value, but longer term as well. Could Disney keep the employees around? Perhaps…but at, by my calculations, likely a $1.2 billion dollar/year strike against their balance sheet.
I say all this recognizing that it eliminates the “person factor”. But for every business model, there are positives and negatives. If you keep a company a “family company” or a private business, the kind of investment money you have at your disposal can prevent growth, which prevents hiring more people to begin with, etc. And a private business might be more inclined to consider the personal cost of layoffs more than a public company. But the public companies tend to be able to grow faster and larger, and employ more people, etc. Yet, their obligations are clearly tied to shareholders in a way isn’t the case with private companies.
Will you change your perspective if they report a profit (same or more) in the 4th quarter like they have every other?